Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

tango

Members
  • Content Count

    1,641
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About tango

  • Rank
    Full Member
  1. I'm not conceding it, and I don't believe he did. NONE of the witnesses said Sheppard tried to hit Bryant. They clearly identified Bryant as the one yelling angrily. I'm saying the obvious, that Bryant would have been better off to take his chances, if that's what he was so darned panicked about. There were people all over the place. One punch would have been a much better outcome, and I hope Bryant is realizing that now. I doubt that even was Sheppard's intent, though: I think he just wanted Bryant to pay for the damage he did to the bike. Hitting him wouldn't accomplish that.
  2. We should always question. That's our democratic duty.
  3. There are other reasons why one gets beaten up than 'being white'. My point is ... do we know?
  4. Not here. There's a commemoration every year - Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Only one vet left now, but he couldn't make it this year. I've seen the history short several times on tv this week. The French couldn't take it. The British couldn't take it. The Canucks took it!
  5. I think there's a clue here: It would appear that forms of political organization in Canada which have been thought of as growing out of the political experience of her population have actually represented an effort to hold in check the kind of political developments which that experience engendered. Responsible government developed in reaction rather than in response to the true democratic spirit of the Canadian people. [26] The validity of this novel interpretation would depend directly on convincing proof that the rebellion had widespread support. Thus, Clark argues that the revolt was popular, but mismanaged: ... it was clear to perhaps all but the smugly righteous lieutenant governor that the province had only narrowly escaped a much more serious uprising. The battle north of Toronto was already under way before the vast majority of Upper Canadians had any hint that a rebellion was contemplated. With no immediate objects to attack local uprisings could not readily develop. Time was too short to muster in support of the larger rebel force. The result, in effect, was a running for cover on the part of many of those throughout the province who had most closely identified themselves with the reform cause." [27] 1837 was a major turning point in our history since it seems to have marked the end of ideological clash. The value systems of the Family Compact and the Mackenzie rebels could not be reconciled in the contemporary political context. One rather unnoticed outcome of the rebellion was that not only were the rebels defeated, the Compact did not survive. Canadians, after this episode, gave up extreme opinions, and in the 1840s R. B. Sullivan and W. H. Merritt, former Tories, could find common ground with Robert Baldwin, the Reformer. A broad stream of opinion, seeking the middle way, has dominated our political life ever since. Extreme opinion has found no home except for third party movements which have been relatively ineffectual. Perhaps, after all, the early whigs were right. The rebellion was a necessary step, but just so it was unsuccessful. The shock of revolt changed the course of constitutional development. Its failure allowed that development to take place within the British tradition. http://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/transactions/3/rebellion1837.shtml The formation of the Dominion of Canada was (and is) a compromise ... a bone offered to quell rebellion, rather than arising from a popular revolution ... not too exciting ... and still the same today. In fact, Canada didn't believe in itself until Vimy Ridge, imo. And the most revolutionary thing we've done is ... universal health care. It ain't all bad!
  6. You were making a joke weren't you? The police are not going to do anything about a bent bike. Couriers have learned to get the money up front. It's a common problem for them, and a common solution to demand the money. Bryant would know that. It never was going slow. Bryant floored it and his tires were squealing all the way across Bloor, with the guy hanging on, shoes making sparks on the pavement. I used to like Bryant, arrogant puppy that he is, but this is truly sick, imo. How could anyone do that to a person? There was help available. You can't kill someone just because he *might* punch you. Don't worry: Bryant will get off with a slap on the wrist ... but he shouldn't. He got to spend a night in jail, anyway. I'll bet he's wishing today that he had just taken a punch instead, and given the guy the money for a new wheel.
  7. “I find that the claimant would stand out like a ‘sore thumb’ due to his colour in any part of the country,” tribunal panel chair William Davis said in his decision to grant Huntley refugee status. How does he know that ... "in any part of the country". I think the panel went a little overboard with their comments. Lookit mrcan jumpin all over hisself to welcome immigrants ... as long as they are WHITE (and preferably racist). Gee, I wonder if this dude and the other one were involved in drugs or anything criminal? That could account for them getting harassed. Nobody else wonder about that? I think more thought is needed on this. Do we accept all refugees who are subject to persecution, even if it's because they are criminals? Not saying these guys are ... but how do we know? Seems like a pretty open door. Not surprised that the usual anti-immigrant crowd are giving this guy a pass: Just proves again that anti-immigrant attitudes in Canada are largely due to white supremacist thinking.
  8. I don't believe they do when they are incarcerated. As is is fine with me. oops ... i'm wrong: Supreme Court says they can. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...006&no_ads= 2006: This is the second time federal prisoners have been allowed to vote since the Supreme Court struck down part of the Elections Act in 2002. It had been challenged under the charter of rights by a convicted murderer. The court said voting could teach inmates democratic values and social responsibility. Shane Shoemaker, serving a life sentence for first-degree murder at Edmonton Institution, agrees. He and other inmates at the maximum-security prison have been following the campaign on TV in their cells. There are no election posters on the walls. No candidates have come to door-knock. "Most guys in prison feel like outcasts. Voting is kind of a big thing," says Shoemaker, 30, who hails from Calgary. "You feel like you are contributing to society." Shoemaker, who is into the eighth year of his sentence, says most inmates plan to vote for any party other than the Conservatives.
  9. Sorry pliny. my mistake. However, I agree with small c.
  10. It looks like everyone is claiming the first!
  11. Link? Never mind ... http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/200...07f60322f70603e North Dakota Is Home to First U.S. Mosque And sometime around 1929 or 1930, when they realized they would be staying in North Dakota, working as farmers and raising their families here, the Lebanese community decided to build a mosque. I guess you are right about being first, though not the location.
  12. We won't ever know all the facts, and regardless of 'self defence', frankly, I can't comprehend how someone could do that to another person. period. I do believe he could have deescalated the situation without that. He says he's "innocent" of "the more serious charges" which means he'll take a plea bargain, I expect. If convicted of the most serious charge, criminal negligence causing death, racers can face life in prison. But, Taylor said that almost never happens. "To my knowledge, there isn't (a convicted street racer) who has served more than five months in jail," he said. In November 2000, street racers in Vancouver killed 51-year-old Irene Thorpe, a pedestrian, and were convicted of criminal negligence causing death The two teens involved, Sukvir Singh Khosa and Bahadur Singh Bhalru, were given conditional sentences of two years less a day and placed under house arrest — a sentence that provoked outrage in most of the country.
×
×
  • Create New...